I have a PhD and I'm probably going to flunk the UKCAT!!!

[Dr_Ciggie]

I recently decided to take the UKCAT because apparently a majority of UK medical schools require applicants to have taken it. Having done some practice questions from all sections using the "how to pass the UKCAT" book, I have deduced that this is the most pointless and childish method to test an applicants suitability for entrance into medical school. The most futile section is "Abstract Reasoning". Since when has one's ability to scrutinize boxes to find patterns "hidden" within them become an important determinant of success as a medical student? Well if the UKCAT is a measure of intelligence, then I guess I am pretty stupid despite having a PhD because my practice test results are pretty abysmal.
The UK should really focus less on trying to make the selection criteria for medicine ludicrously competitive, especially by introducing such entrance tests. Do they not get it? WE NEED MORE DOCTORS!! In the bigger spectrum of things, poor UKCAT results could result in an oversea's doctor being appointed by the NHS instead of a "potential" native medic. Now don't get me wrong, I have nothing against overseas medics coming to the UK to practice medicine but in all reality, a balance is required. Seriously, the fact that they are using the UKCAT as a part of the admission process is laughable, but I guess I don't have a choice but to figure out why I am too dumb to get most of the questions right. I will most likely be attending the KAPLAN training course scheduled for the 19th of sept with hopes that someone will explain the "secret" to me lol. I sometimes think that if a BSc, MSc and PhD is not sufficient to warrant at the very least, an interview then I shouldn't be wasting my time..
Anyway I better get back to practicing looking at silly boxes..After all, "time is of the essence in the UKCAT" lol!!! If any of you could be kind enough to enlighten me as to how to deal with these boxes, then plz..do share!! Thank you in advance and have a nice day

[Martigan]

May I ask what your PhD's in?

Personally I do think that the UKCAT seems just like a glorified IQ test.

Perhaps I don't understand a PhD well enough, but you seem to be able to pass that with a only a certain level (still above average) of intelligence, but a lot of hard work and analysis.

Where as to me intelligence is more about immediately being able to “see” the answer from a mass of data.

Consider the AR you mention. Basically, if you have enough time, most people of average intelligence will be able to work out the patterns. However, a person with a high IQ should be able to spot it faster, thus the time pressure of test, helps assess intelligence.

You seem to think that being able to spot and understand patterns in apparently random data is irrelevant to medicine. If so, how do you think a doctor diagnoses?

On a totally separate point is communications skills are important as a doctor, (mine aren’t the best so I’m more aware of this). If may be worth considering braking your text block up a little. It makes it easier to read and comprehend your points.

[Leo2004]

The idea of these types of tests is to spot speed of analysis, something which in a different abstract way is extremely important as a doctor. That doesn't make the test taking any less like pulling teeth, however.

In all honesty, a PhD suggests a post masters understanding of principles of a science discipline and the ability to formulate a hypothesis which you test through an extended piece of lab work. Whilst a lot of my colleagues with PhDs are doing well in med school, I am not sure that the possession of one in some way means one automatically has the right skills and aptitude to be a doctor. I know many people with PhDs who certainly do not.

What I mean by this is basically that the two endeavours - having a phd - and being able to pass a required entrance test do not necessarily follow.

I am sure you will pass though and that you have what it takes, so just hang in there. Once you get an interview off the back of a good score, the possession of a PhD will be looked on very favourably...

Best of Luck!

[Dr_Ciggie]

My PhD is in bioinformatics with an emphasis on Molecular Immunology & Oncology.

"Perhaps I don't understand a PhD well enough, but you seem to be able to pass that with a only a certain level (still above average) of intelligence, but a lot of hard work and analysis."

You cannot generalise a doctorate degree because it varies from discipline to discipline. While it is true that "most" PhD's can be attained through diligence and an above average intelligence, some very specific fields of study rely on high intelligence aswell as hard work. For instance, a PhD in a pure biological field (such as immunology) relies heavily on successful lab results, which does not require a lot of intelligence simply because you have to follow protocols and troubleshoot here and there.

Bioinformatics on the other hand is more oriented towards computational analysis and undertaking such a PhD would require you to write computer code/algorithms to solve complex biological problems; something that demands high intelligence.

Another factor that must be considered is that the quality of a PhD is not standard. I know many people who have scraped through a PhD ("OK" results from the Viva) without publishing a single paper in a peer-reviewed journal. Hence, there is also a variance in the "quality" of PhD degrees.

I still stand to the point that spotting patterns from abstract sets of shapes is a futile act, which does not reflect one's ability (or inability) to be a good doctor. My older brother is an MD in the United States, and an excellent one for that matter. He scored 87 in the USMLE's and yet he answered most of the AR questions incorrectly. Quite ironic don't you think? A doctor failing the AR test? hmm. We both independently came to the conclusion that the AR section of the UKCAT is completely irrelevant to the study of medicine.

There is a big difference between making a difficult diagnosis and spotting obscure patterns from abstract sets of shapes. In the real world, things do not work that way. The decision analysis section is much more pertinent with regards to this as opposed to AR..

Don't get me wrong. I will find a way to ace this test but that is not really the point. The point is that it is "silly"..If this subject miraculously crops up in the interview, I will not hesitate to speak my mind in front of the panel. I am sure I will entertain them with some harsh facts about the UKCAT.

[bright_lights]

Not been a good day mate? Got to disagree with you on the point medicine shoud be less competitive - it can't be taken that everyone who wants to do the course will automatically be able to, and well. It is people's lives in your hands.

Although I'm pretty undecided on the UKCAT myself - on one hand more and more people are getting lots of A's in school and everyones personal statement is going to great so its hard to distinguish between candidates. I suppose the UKCAT helps distinguish between 'intelligence' and people who arent as bright but have worked hard for their grades. To be honest I'd rather have a hard working doctor than one who's good at spotting patterns but some institutions may disagree.

And in regards to spotting patterns, plenty of practise, look for recurring shapes, lines, angles, numbers. Try and find the pattern before u look at the options. And if ur really stuck - guess. Instinct can often be the best method in this section, ur brain may register patterns subconciously before u can put them into words.

I should also add that i'm studying immunology and yes it is a damn difficult subject so to hav a pHD in it is impressive. Big it up on ur PS and you can worry less about ur UKCAT.

[Dr_Ciggie]

Yep, had an awful day and the UKCAT prep book isn't exactly helping! Perhaps I was unclear about the point I made regarding making medicine less competitive. I am not implying that they should make it "easy" for people to get in. I will give you an example of a case where a very good freind of mine was rejected by all 4 medical schools in 2001 just because he got BBB in his a levels. The difference between ABB and BBB is insignificant in the bigger spectrum of things, yet he was denied entry. He is now a practising oncologist in Australia.

At that time, I can remember that the immigration policy was quite flexible and there was a large influx of foreign medical doctors coming into the UK to practice medicine. I encountered several of these doctors at the time because my mother was ill with diabetes and I went with her for her check-ups and hospital appointments. I can distinctly remember that a consultant mis-diagnosed her as having frozen shoulder when the actual diagnosis was diabetic neuropathy. He was from Pakistan.

I am not generalising all foreign docs but many of them are not very good compared to the ones that graduate locally. I feel that the NHS would be better off if native doctors were to increase in number. This is easily achievable if UK medical schools were to increase their intake per year. So I was making that point in this context.

Thanks for the advice regarding AR. I am sure I will figure it out sooner or later lol.

[Martigan]

Hi Ciggie.

I agree different PhD’s require different skills which is why my first question was to the nature/subject of your PhD. From your explanation I would agree that your PhD does require a good degree of several key facets of “intelligence”.

I don’t subscribe to the fixed view of intelligence that some people do, as I feel it is made up of too many aspects covering such a range of different areas. E.g. as a generalisation women, on average, tend to have higher emotional intelligence, and males, on average, better spatial awareness. Difference facets, neither “more intelligent” that the other.

Like many tests, it’s just a crude indicator of certain skills / abilities. Considering there is such a mixed bag of skills that can make up what is a Doctor I don’t know how it can effectively test them. But I can see how it might indicate some aspects which Medschools value. However many Medschools, like you, don’t rate it and thus don’t use it. (Though I doubt they consider it silly. )

And in regards to spotting patterns, plenty of practise, look for recurring shapes, lines, angles, numbers. Try and find the pattern before u look at the options. And if ur really stuck - guess. Instinct can often be the best method in this section, ur brain may register patterns subconciously before u can put them into words.

I agree. When I first looked at them, I just did not click with it and got REALLY frustrated with AR. It bugged the hell out of me at the time, as spotting patterns, links, logic etc in what appears to be disparate data has always been my “thing”. I worked on it using the “600 question book” and the test exam from the website. This helped me feel a lot better as I got the mind set and could do the ones in the book fast and accurately. However in the real thing I just could not see them so I had to guess most of them. But considering as my guesses still gave me what appears to be a top 15% score it gives a lot of credence to the sub-conscious recognition argument.

I do think that and AR style test has a lot of value for medicine, but I would agree that the UKCAT could be better IMHO. It’s seems to have a very narrow style, with some amazingly abstract rules. I would think having some verbal or numeric groups would make it more well rounded.

[Dr_Ciggie]

I agree with most of your points. If you were to examine the content and style of questions used for the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT) in the U.S, I am almost certain that you will instantly notice it's superiority as a better testing method than the UKCAT. This is predominantly because the MCAT's require applicants to "apply" their understanding of a given subject, be it chemistry, physics, biology, essay writing or verbal comprehension within a reasonable time constraint.

The UKCAT on the other hand is more about speed, which is not necessarily a measure of intelligence. I would rather take my time with reading a passage carefully and critically (within a "reasonable" time constraint of course) so that I can accentuate my appreciation of the passage, as opposed to reading it quickly to avoid the risk of not finishing the test on time. There are no doubt some highly intelligent individuals out there who cannot read very fast, and the fact that they would score low on the VR portion of the UKCAT is not indicative of their lack of potential as a medical doctor.

Maybe I see things differently because I am a mature applicant, who knows.

[magpie7]

Maybe I see things differently because I am a mature applicant, who knows.

Or maybe it's just because you are finding it harder than you were expecting, and it's stressing you out?

You think because you have a Ph.D it gives you the 'right' to a good score, and to find the test easy? Yes, you do. There are plenty of people that struggle with the UKCAT, and voice this to others. You don't see them saying, "I have 95% in all my A-Levels, I'm a member of Mensa High IQ Society and privately educated... Oh, and by the way I'm finding the UKCAT harder than I thought!"

Be honest; if you were finding it easy, would you really come on here and make a thread complaining how it's "too easy" and as a result, pointless? No, of course you wouldn't.

The UKCAT is a 'Culture Fair Test' where even the very disadvantaged, in terms of education, can score well in and say "this is a better indication of my intelligence than my grades."

If you want an Admissions Test that your Ph.D will give you a small advantage in, perhaps consider the BMAT?

[Dr_Ciggie]

First of all, you should abstain from expressing your views on a given subject until or unless you are clear on the context!

I never suggested that having a PhD should give me the "right" to a good score. I have taken standardized tests before and I can usually appreciate the motivation behind their development (i.e. GAMSAT, MCATS etc). However, in the case of the UKCAT I see no logical reason behind testing a candidate's ability to answer questions quickly "in the context of assessing his/her ability to study medicine"..

The US entrance exams have it right! They make the questions difficult but give sufficient time for them to be answered, which overall gives more of an accurate measure of "intelligence" (if you want to use that word) as compared to the UKCAT..

Be honest; if you were finding it easy, would you really come on here and make a thread complaining how it's "too easy" and as a result, pointless? No, of course you wouldn't.


What makes you so sure that I wouldn't react in the same way even if I found this test to be easy? Indeed I would because I have the ability to be pragmatic..

If you want an Admissions Test that your Ph.D will give you a small advantage in, perhaps consider the BMAT?

I am not searching for an "easy way out". I was merely expressing my opinion (which we are all entitled to) about the admissions process by questioning it's use of the UKCAT scores. Further, I admit that I am somewhat frustrated due to the nature of the test and I imagine many others also feel the same way. However, my motivation for starting this thread was to make a point that according to "my" opinion, the very premise of the UKCAT is flawed because it places far too much emphasis on speed at the expense of accuracy.

Now, perhaps this ought to put things into perspective for you. The following is a paragraph taken from page 5 of the "How to pass the UKCAT" book by Mike Bryon & Jim Clayden:

"Some very clever and highly educated people do not do well at tests like the UKCAT. In some cases their training and inclination do not best serve them well under the rather artificial conditions and abstract questions of a tightly timed test. This happens when, for example, the candidate thinks too deeply about the question or reads the passages and questions too carefully. Some place too high an emphasis on accuracy at the expense of speed. The outcome is that their test result does not reflect their true ability or their achievements to date. If you are such a person then you may need to develop an approach that involves a slightly greater risk of getting a question wrong for the sake of speed, or you may need to accept the assertions and statements at face value and focus on the immediate task of answering the questions"

In a nutshell, the UKCAT does not accurately reflect a person's intelligence!

I am treating the test like something that I have to do as a part of the admission process, but regardless of the scores I get, I will "personally" not take them seriously.